On June 18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Can you tell me what you suspect might be the problem? I've always
I can't, because I never got around to reproducing it myself.
> I'm familiar with (but not proficient at) lisp. My usual technique
> for debugging emacs problems is to redefine the offending function in
> the *scatch* buffer and dink with it, but I'm a loss with the
> bbdb-search macro. How shall I proceed?
Running screaming is, I find, often a satisfying (albeit ineffective)
reaction.
But seriously :) Can you try getting back to absolute basics on this?
Run emacs -q, give it enough detail to fire up BBDB, and then see if
you can reproduce the bug. Try it with a BBDB with only one entry in
it, or try it with the specific entry you posted earlier. Basically,
try and cut down to the minimum possible setup to reproduce the bug,
because otherwise you're in macro-debugging hell and I'll have to fend
off the people who want to rewrite it all to make it more
comprehensible. Can't be any good if it's comprehensible, dammit.
Waider. And the attached .sig was, in fact, a random choice by emacs. Heh.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / Yes, it /is/ very personal of me.
This is going to hurt, isn't it. Maybe I should just run screaming now and
save myself the bother.
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info
BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
